why aren't the cabelas kentucky pc

[Dphar]

or are they? i believe when i got mine the paper work that came with it said they were reinactment approved.mine is a flintlock by the way. i really dont care ,just curious...

The approval of equipment will be up to the people organizing any given event. The Pedersoli Kentucky is something Pedersoli put together to have a flint kentucky in their lineup. They could have just as easily have made it right for 1770 but this would not have allowed them to use their in stock parts or use the parts easily on other firearms. Its good business.

People just starting into re-enacting can be cut some slack. This was the case in the 60s and 70s. Things have gotten more strict today but then the opportunity to properly supply oneself with the right period clothing and equipment is much easier now than it was 40 years ago. But one maybe 2 events should be the limit if considerable improvement is not evident.

The more period correct the camp and its occupants are the better the experience is for everyone. Thus it behooves everyone to strive for this.
However..
If we are too parochial in our view of new people's "outfit" we will discourage participation. So we need some tolerance for the new guy. Its a hard call to make. Its easy for someone with a proper outfit and 10-20 years of gathering to get it right to decry the appearance of the wrong shirt, rifle or shoes but he likely was not "perfect" when he started.
While the looks of the various factory made rifles generally activates my gag reflex and I once saw a guy come within a hare's breath of blowing his head off with one do to poor workmanship in the lock I still tolerate the things.
So...
Shoot the Pedesoli and enjoy it. It will teach you the skills you need to shoot a flintlock and will bring you closer to American history. If your interest grows you will evolve and surely acquire something closer to the American rifle of your chosen time period.
However, A rifle of this type is not an investment as is a custom or semi-custom rifle built to stricter traditional criteria. It is not as user friendly, reliable or as safe. Good rifles generally do not depreciate.
If you have the chance, examine and hopefully shoot some well made rifles that are accurate representations of American rifles of the period you might be interested in. Remember a 1770s rifle can be used and will be proper at a 1830s event but a 1830s rifle is not acceptable as a Revolutionary War arm. These rifles had very long service lives and many were in use for generations.
Thus if you want to attend re-enactments of the 1750s- 1770s to be correct you need an early rifle. But it will be correct for any re-enactment to about the Civil War era.
These early rifles seem less refined than rifles of the 1790s-1820s. Large locks. Wide butts etc. but when you handle one, made by a master, you will find they are FINE rifles with carefully laid out stocks and good lines and they shoulder and hold very well.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

"Old Sally" looks nothing like the generic mass produced rifles you cite. The old girl is of stout build and carries a back action lock. Her trigger guard is similar to the ones Dimmick used and the barrel used keys instead of pins. The barrel is of much greater heft and the two piece stock appears to be a take-down type rather than an attempt to save money on stock wood. In other words, it's not even a remotely similar rifle in either quality or appearance.

"Sally" is a no nonsense working rifle, excellent patent breech etc. She is a takedown with a 2 piece stock. But note that she currently is a 69 cal smoothbore according to "Firearms of the American West 1803-1865" . Obviously having been made into a shotgun in her later years. She may have been shortened at some time but this would be difficult to determine.
As you state the cheap two piece stocked imports are not in her class.
Meek surely used several rifles over time. This is likely the last survivor. I don't recall of he got "Old Sally" back from the Crows or not. Link below gives the start of the story but not the ending. Would have to dig through my books to re-read to find out if the loss was permanent. Been a number of years since I read "Meek".

Dan[url] http://books.google.com/books...hSts87TU&sig=cqHUvSO2nt1Tojjea26f3VhYADY[/url]

 

[Runner]

Like I said, there is PC and HC. I am PC for the most part. HC does not interest me.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

It seems to me that Cabelas rifle would be "not too far wrong" for the late 19th century when thin, delicate looking rifles were being made for recreational shooters. Not at all like the rifles made in the 18th and early 19 centuries. As others have said, you should examine some originals or even some good custom made reproductions and you will at once realize the difference. In fact, I'd even suggest you go online to Track of The Wolf and look at the rifles for sale and their kits. I'm not necessarily suggesting you buy there but they have excellent photos showing all details of the rifles for sale and of rifles built from their kits. Those rifles may not be entirely perfect in all details either but you will at once see that what Cabelas calls a "Kentucky Rifle" bears very little resemblance to a "real" rifle of that period.

 

[tg]

Could someone explain the difference between PC which is a specific time period in history and HC which is Historicaly correct? I would have to vote on both having so much the same meaning that they could be interchangable, unless we are using semantics to wriggle something into a position it may not belong.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Period Correct and Historically Correct would essentially be the same thing wouldn't they?

 

[tg]

That would be my thought Russ, but I have been wrong before...once... back in 1974 I believe it was...

 

[Coot]

Perhaps Runner is using HC in the sense of "hard core" ??

 

[Halftail]

Or.....Hairy Canary..... :youcrazy: :wink:

 

[Claude Mathis]

Period Correct and Historically Correct would essentially be the same thing wouldn't they?

That is how I use them and how they have been used on the Forum.

"Period Correct", "Historically Correct" and "Historically Accurate" would be synonyms for the same concept.

 

[tg]

""Period Correct", "Historically Correct" and "Historically Accurate" would be synonyms for the same concept"

that is reasonable, now could you tell me how this thread had stayed so civil (VBG)

 

[Runner]

PC would be a forged iron barrel stocked in wood that loads from the front and propells a bullet using hot gases created by burning black powder that was ignited by the lock.
HC is worrying about what the trigger guard looked like or how the wood is carved on a piece that is PC.
Joe, I am no newcomer. My mentor is a well known smith that builds also. I have been shooting muzzleloaders for over 30 years now. I have handled a lot of guns over the years.
As far as I know, very few folks here head to the range with iron barreled rifles, despite being a sample of the most obsessed muzzleloaders there are. Almost every gun the shows up at most gatherings, and 100 percent of those that go to the line have modern steel barrels. Every single gun is a compromise between historic accuracy and the person's budget. I just don't see the fancier guns any differently than all the other guns out there. I surely enjoy looking at and handling a lot of the art type guns. After I look at them and drool a little, I get real and go look at the guns I can afford!
Have a nice day!

 

[Dphar]

PC would be a forged iron barrel stocked in wood that loads from the front and propells a bullet using hot gases created by burning black powder that was ignited by the lock.
HC is worrying about what the trigger guard looked like or how the wood is carved on a piece that is PC.
Joe, I am no newcomer. My mentor is a well known smith that builds also. I have been shooting muzzleloaders for over 30 years now. I have handled a lot of guns over the years.
As far as I know, very few folks here head to the range with iron barreled rifles, despite being a sample of the most obsessed muzzleloaders there are. Almost every gun the shows up at most gatherings, and 100 percent of those that go to the line have modern steel barrels. Every single gun is a compromise between historic accuracy and the person's budget. I just don't see the fancier guns any differently than all the other guns out there. I surely enjoy looking at and handling a lot of the art type guns. After I look at them and drool a little, I get real and go look at the guns I can afford!
Have a nice day!

But can you determine the material by LOOKING? Perhaps at several feet? Without destructive testing? This is the point. If it looks period correct that is all the at matters. Carbon steel barrels with a little rust look remarkably like iron. You would not care for the 18th century mode of cleaning practiced on the frontier and the insurance company will not like nearly every firearm in camp being loaded. Which would be "HC".
Re-enacting is constrained by many things. We ride to camp in a modern conveyance in most cases. Another is the availability of the items. Forge welded wrought iron barrels are hard to come by and are not as safe as drilled and reamed "gun barrel bar stock" barrels.
We can carry this PC/HC to ridiculous lengths but its counter productive.
Its all compromise, we do the best we can. Just because we cannot re-create evey facet of the 18th century perfectly is no reason to allow 1960s hippie garb and gas powered generators since its not perfect anyway so why bother.
The finish, especially on the wood is often not historically accurate. But this is not reason to allow fiberglass stocks.
I don't even like being on the firing like with cheap repros or any gun with a drum and nipple since I don't know how its constructed. I do not consider this system safe. But I am not going to run the the dog soldiers over it. I just stay away while its being fired.
BTW Golden Age Arms used to sell "soft iron" barrels with seven grooves, made by Douglas. I have no idea what they were really made of.

The budget thing is why I council tolerance of new people. They need a chance to try the waters and "perfect" outfits are not really possible for people with no experience. A good rifle costs little more today than it did then, in fact they probably cost a lot less. Several pounds for a rifle in 1770 was a lot on money to some people. Historically correct but plain rifles are out there. Considering the cost of some of the imports a $1000 semi-custom does not seem so expensive.

Dan

 

Tolerance is deserved by those who have tolerance for others. I can't stand someone who snubs someone else for what type of gun/rifle they are shooting. Especially when the snubber is shooting a piece of manure himself. Then, what really gets interesting, the snubber talks about HC/PC made rifles and guns not being HC/PC because the barrels are not made of forged iron barrels. :rotf: :rotf: Some folks will never get it.

Runner, you may not be a newcomer but you still are a greenhorn. Because you are unteachable. Open your ears and clamp your lips and listen to some of us that have been around the block. I, for one, don't like your attitude.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Now that is simply splitting hairs and deliberately being obtuse!

 

[Runner]

No Russ, it isn't. It is simple logic and observation at gatherings and around folks in the hobby. Around here, most of the gun builders don't set up a camp at gatherings. They come for the day only so they can try to make some money. It isn't a hobby or even a passion for them anymore. It is a business. They set up on the edge of the camp with a blanket and they talk to customers when they have to. They spend the day pointing and laughing at everyone else over little details and asking each other questions trying to prove they know more than the other guy. They don't even dress or participate in the event. They are often the saddest looking and poorest acting bunch in camp, including the newcomers and drunks. The only thing that is important is being the person that knows the most that day and cash.
I made a conscious decision to not be one of them ever years back.
Most of my years shooting muzzleloaders I spent alone or in the company of modern shooters. I will return to shooting that way long before the hobby becomes a I know more than you contest for me, hopefully. The folks with beginners guns are welcome around my fire. The people with supposedly historically accurate guns are too as long as they can get along with the others. If not, they leave first, before the newcomers. The newcomers with "Kentuckies" are much more important to the hobby than they are, in my opinion.
You all have a nice day!

 

I haven't seen this attitude exhibited by you here on the forum, Runner. i.e. underhammer users, sideslapper users, etc. Your tolerance and respect for other members HC/PC ignition systems other than flintlock is a bit lacking. Your attitude towards those who try to share their knowledge with others here is a bit disrespectful at best. If you would exhibit the same tolerance for others that you claim to have at camp you would be better off in my opinion. Of course you can not see my posts because you have put me on "Ignore" along with others who have tried to teach you something....

 

[tg]

Well not matter how I stack it I get PC and HC as basicaly the same meaning, as any time "period" is a particular time in "history" but folks can make their own choices on this issue I think the majority would use the two interchangably....did I speak to soon about this thread being civil?

obtuse!...I like that word Russ..may use it myself sometime.

 

[Many Klatch]

Runner, I agree, the newcomers that can just afford one gun need some slack. I started out with a Thompson Center Hawken and I was crushed when I found out that the local club only shot flintlocks. But the people there took me in hand, taught me how to build my own flintlock and I shot with them until the club lost it's shooting range.

We seem to have two kinds of people show up at historic reenactments. The threadcounters with everything dead nuts accurate and the aggressively stupid that try to get by with "they'd have used it if they'd have had it" I can get along with the threadcounters, I have been one myself. I love to help the newbies if they have the right attitude. The agressively stupid?, well they can just go somewhere else.

Many Klatch

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

The sad old argument about the forged barrels and hand made locks etc usually pops up in these discussions to undermine the historical or period correctness of a rifle or fowler that has been carefully crafted to appear like an original. The idea is sophomoric at best: because a hand crafted reproduction wasn't made in exactly the same way as a 200 year old original it has no more period correctness than a Spanish repro with a two piece beechwood stock that resembles nothing from the old days. There is no way to have a reasonable discussion with someone who broaches this argument as they seem to have no respect for the research and careful work that a gunmaker does to make one of these beautiful guns. You are right--PC and HC are the same--except to a hairsplitter. And perhaps a hairsplitter with PC envy is to be given a little extra latitude as he is dealing with a double handicap...???